Monday, April 11, 2011


How many parks do we need and where do we need them? How much government owned land do we need and where is it needed? Yellowstone ain't moving soon. The Grand Canyon is pretty much staying put. Death Valley, still being dead, isn't moving either. Our biggest national park, called Alaska, is way up north and appears to be set in its ways. The wee one, Acadia National Park in Maine, is serenely resting where it is and has no plans to abandon the Atlantic Ocean.

Obama wants to buy more land for parks. Why? Because Americans "can go days without stepping on a single blade of grass."

The government(s) already own about 1/3 of the land in the United States of America, but they want more. I feel like the spouse that takes a second job to support my significant other's shopping necessities. But first where is Obama going to buy that land and with what? Well, last first, he's going to buy it with our money, but he's doing it for the children. First last, he’s going to buy it where it isn’t needed which means there is another reason to buy all this land and conservation isn’t part of the equation except in the talking points.

I am assuming, which is dangerous with Obama, that his pitch about the elusive blades of grass is pathos for all, but especially about the children. Where are these children whose feet will never touch a blade of grass? Idaho? Ohio? Iowa? Nope, they’re in big cities, specifically the inner city and where, outside of Detroit, is Obama going to find land to fill with so many blades of grass? Put that aside for a moment and ask how the children are going to get to these blades of citified grass luring them to a caressing care for the urban soul? It won’t be by bicycle. It will have to be by some mode of transportation that requires more roads, more unisex bathrooms, more facilities for the disabled, more security, more food stands, more parking lots and all the other things that government likes which starts to point out that each park better be huge if they want to include those elusive blades of grass. We already know we don’t have the money to purchase said nature (HA, who cares? It’s for the children and the good of the nation to have idle land.), but is Obama aware that there aren’t huge swaths of land available where his needed parks would actually do what he wants them to do?

Oh, let’s cut the crap here. Obama and his Democrat compatriots don’t give a whit about blades of grass nor more parks nor the people that go for days without stepping on either. They want government to control more land and I’ll betcha the land they buy will be sitting on top of something farmable like oil, gas, metals and other useful products that could raise the GNP. 

BTW, that grassy goodness won’t be anywhere near people that haven’t touched it for days.